>>>>> On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:54:26 -0400, 
>>>>> Margaret Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

> "I don't know.  A year ago, I would have said "no", but with 
> documents on the IESG agenda like draft-black-snmp-uri-08.txt, I am 
> taking a new view of URIs.  This document defines a URI syntax that 
> can be used for access to SNMP objects, and one of the use cases 
> includes having a local SNMP manager that is accessed through a URI 
> -- the URI then being translated into an SNMP request that is sent to 
> the agent via SNMP.

> So, URIs can, effectively, be used as a programmatic interface to 
> other applications running on the local system.  In that sort of 
> case, I think we very well might need to include scoped addresses in 
> URIs.  And, IMO, it would be better to have a standard way to do this 
> than to live in a world where folks just insert an unencoded % and 
> some parsers pass it through cleanly, others escape it for you and 
> still others return an error -- which is how the current behaviour of 
> URI parsers has been described in this thread."

In case I misunderstood the scenario, please let me check.  Are you
talking about a scenario where a "client" passes a URI to an SNMP
manager including an IPv6 link-local address with a zone ID for the
client, and the manager then parses the URI and sends a corresponding
SNMP request?  If so, it's an unintended (or even prohibited) usage 
in the current IPv6 scoped address architecture due to the "locality"
reason Erik pointed out.

Of course,

- whether it's worth standardizing the URI notation with zone IDs for
  a pure local usage is a separate question.
- whether we should even more explicitly prohibit such usage (as Pekka
  indicated) is also a separate issue.

                                        JINMEI, Tatuya
                                        Communication Platform Lab.
                                        Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to